Is this life activity, what ever it may be, worth $10,000 an hour? This seemingly outlandish question — at least at first anyway — came across my ears recently from a podcast with a former college who recommends continually asking this question. While our paths have mostly diverted — in very valid and beneficial ways for both — this question strikes strong in its power and its command of prioritization.
I too have yet to find anything to qualify. Besides being able to speak with fellow human beings in real life (something we still take for granted), meditation is the only thing coming close for me.
This $10,000 question, in a very common way most modern people easily innerstand, slaps us with the immediacy, fleeting nature and importance of each and every moment, never to return again in the same way.
As for meditation being the closest thing worth $10,000 an hour, imagine actually paying that amount then meditating. Do you think your mind would wander off as much?
If you’re already around the ages of 30 or 40 are there really many experiences left on your bucket list significantly different from what you’ve already known and/or watched and heard many countless others do?
This is not to discredit external reality, it is more to draw attention to our inner worlds which remain primarily unexplored by the masses with access not currently as limited as the external world in extent and ease of accessibility. Not to mention the primary reasons for meditation.
Whatever the answer, or lack of answer to this question is — using a $10,000 monetary price point as a mirror to represent real non-monetary value — do you humbly value your time, and more importantly, yourself in such a way?
The extent of shaming and shameless proliferation in the meditating mind can sometimes be staggering. (Perhaps drawing inspiration from the hand sketched characters within the artwork from the Beastie Boy’s Hot Sauce Committee Part 2 record) what’s listed below are various forms of mental activity that can arise and fade away during meditation reformulated into a personality, character or title.
The wide ranging advice and instructions on how to address and deal with these characters won’t be gone into here other than the self-inquiry prompts of: what do you do, or would you do, or not do with these guys while on the cushion? What kind of character considers such a question? What kind of relationships are involved? Would it make sense to allow (any of) them a supporting role in staying with the meditation object? Should I just delete this blog post?
Also, feel free to sketch these.
There’s the:
inquirer
master planner
helper
humanitarian
reminiscer
instructor
conversationalist
alarmist
fascinater
baiter
day dreamer
fantasizer
the space out
lostling
authoritarian
(false) expert
distractor
escapist
infantilist
royalist
analyser / analyst
doubter
freak(out)
proliferationist
urger
advocate
brainiac
(false) genius
trickster
dice(wo)man
deliverer
rescuer
messenger
calmist
doer
(play-by-play sports) commentator
comedian
fixer
cell mate
validator
admirer
person of valor
assessor
judge, jury and executioner
reveler
revelator
marketer and promoter
manager
thought/people pleaser
commiserater
follower
guru
officiant
entitlement demander
referee
negotiator
arbitrator
diplomat
justifier
astonisher
4/6/2021 UPDATE: Recently realized a potential caveat pertaining to this post — that which some call Dissociative Identity Disorder (formally known as Multiple Personality Disorder) while others mention (their) “alters”. Whether creditable or not, such a topic and related topics seemly hold potential to become quite dark quite quickly with material like the Congressionally documented Project MK ULTRA; claims of (Project) Monarch; SRA/trauma-based-mind-control (with two counselors being Sandra Fecht and Jay Parker); and even a book called The Illuminati Formula to Create an Undetectable Total Mind Control Slave which enumerates intricate details. The links above are a few one-sided resources — as countering information seems more easily locatable at the moment. Such links are for those who feel called to research this stuff in the cases that this post happened to trigger more than eliciting lightheartedness and if there happens to be anything to this. If researching please exercise caution and discernment and know the researcher bears responsibly for any and all outcomes, or lack of outcomes.
4 : something true makes lies sound like veracities
Truth. Solipsism? 2 + 2 = 4. Relative and ultimate truths. Here’s some quotes and bits and pieces regarding truth (which doesn’t really need defending):
Truth is that which conforms to fact and reality. Truth is precise accordance with what is. Truth is the body of real things, actual events, genuine facts. Truth is the authentic nature and condition of something.
Truth is not a reward for good behavior nor a prize for passing some tests. It cannot be brought about. It is the primary, the unborn, the ancient source of all that is. You are eligible because you are. You need not merit truth. It is your own..
~Nisargadatta Maharaj
“…people are prepared to transcend all moral boundaries to sustain their view and to fixate upon it beyond all reason. Beyond investigation. Investigation is considered a conspiracy. To actually try to find truth is considered a deviant occupation…”
~Ajahn Sucitto
“Bright, loud and mobile is the false. Subtle and indistinct is the true.”
There are higher truths as well as lower truths wherein each lower truth acts as a step on a staircase helping you ascend into higher altitudes of perspective.
Matt Kahn
Two truths teaching in Buddhism — “conventional” or “provisional” (saṁvṛti) truth, and the “ultimate” (paramārtha) truth.
When you want to help people, you tell them the truth. When you want to help yourself, you tell them what they want to hear.
~Thomas Sowell
There are truths that are 4 ways:
pleasant and profitable
unpleasant and profitable
pleasant and unprofitable
unpleasant and unprofitable
“As for the course of action that is unpleasant to do but that, when done, leads to what is profitable, it’s in light of this course of action that one may be known—in terms of manly stamina, manly persistence, manly effort—as a fool or a wise person. For a fool doesn’t reflect, ‘Even though this course of action is unpleasant to do, still when done it leads to what is profitable.’ So he doesn’t do it, and thus the non-doing of that course of action leads to what is unprofitable for him. But a wise person reflects, ‘Even though this course of action is unpleasant to do, still when done it leads to what is profitable.’ So he does it, and thus the doing of that course of action leads to what is profitable for him.
“As for the course of action that is pleasant to do but that, when done, leads to what is unprofitable, it’s in light of this course of action that one may be known— in terms of manly stamina, manly persistence, manly effort—as a fool or a wise person. For a fool doesn’t reflect, ‘Even though this course of action is pleasant to do, still when done it leads to what is unprofitable.’ So he does it, and thus the doing of that course of action leads to what is unprofitable for him. But a wise person reflects, ‘Even though this course of action is pleasant to do, still when done it leads to what is unprofitable.’ So he doesn’t do it, and thus the non-doing of that course of action leads to what is profitable for him.”
“…There are five things that can turn out in two ways in the here-&-now. Which five? Conviction, liking, unbroken tradition, reasoning by analogy, & an agreement through pondering views. These are the five things that can turn out in two ways in the here-&-now. Now some things are firmly held in conviction and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not firmly held in conviction, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. Some things are well-liked and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not well-liked, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. Some things are an unbroken tradition and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not an unbroken tradition, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. Some things are well-reasoned and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not well-reasoned, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. Some things are well-pondered and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not well-pondered, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. In these cases it isn’t proper for a knowledgeable person who safeguards the truth to come to a definite conclusion, ‘Only this is true; anything else is worthless.“
…
When, on observing that the monk is purified with regard to qualities based on delusion, he places conviction in him. With the arising of conviction, he visits him & grows close to him. Growing close to him, he lends ear. Lending ear, he hears the Dhamma. Hearing the Dhamma, he remembers it. Remembering it, he penetrates the meaning of those dhammas. Penetrating the meaning, he comes to an agreement through pondering those dhammas. There being an agreement through pondering those dhammas, desire arises. With the arising of desire, he becomes willing. Willing, he contemplates (lit: “weighs,” “compares”). Contemplating, he makes an exertion. Exerting himself, he both realizes the ultimate meaning of the truth with his body and sees by penetrating it with discernment.
“To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is an awakening to the truth. To this extent one awakens to the truth. I describe this as an awakening to the truth. But it is not yet the final attainment of the truth.
“Yes, Master Gotama, to this extent there is an awakening to the truth. To this extent one awakens to the truth. We regard this as an awakening to the truth. But to what extent is there the final attainment of the truth? To what extent does one finally attain the truth? We ask Master Gotama about the final attainment of the truth.”
“The cultivation, development, & pursuit of those very same qualities: to this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the final attainment of the truth. To this extent one finally attains the truth. I describe this as the final attainment of the truth.”
For this month’s regular open-audience, open-discussion “Ask Us Anything” — continuing discussions about meditation and related topics — Denny gives an in-depth presentation on Qi, Qigong and Daoyin (with presentation slides above) including the following mentions:
Don’t go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, “This contemplative is our teacher.” When you know for yourselves that, “These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness” — then you should enter & remain in them.
As you all know, Josh and I have done a few AUA (Ask Us Anything) sessions. This Thursday (1/14/2021) we are doing our first AUA Live, in response to a simple but profound question asked by our friend and a new student of our Saturday morning exercise/meditation practice …
What Happens to your Mind when you Meditate?
The two formats (AUA versus AUA Live) are slightly different in that the regular AUA is pre-scheduled for every last Tuesday of the month with a pre-selected topic, whereas the LIVE version is more like ER where a question was asked and we find it necessary to answer ASAP. The Live format is going to be less formal.
Please accept our invitation to join us this Thursday. If you want to be in front of the camera, please send us an email [at integratingpresence [AT] protonmail [DOT] com or denny k miu [AT] gmail [DOT] com (without spaces)] so we can send you a link. Or you can watch and provide live comments with the following:
http://dennykmiu.com/Facebook (this one works 100%) [UPDATE: 1/14/21 11:23am Central Time from Denny: “For some reason, I am not able to do live streaming on Facebook today and all my previous videos and posts that had to do with live streaming are deleted. We will go back to Zoom and live stream with Youtube.”]
Thanks and we look forward to seeing you on Thursday (1/14/2021) at 10:00 am PST.
Denny & Josh
(Pre)show notes from Josh:
I usually feel introducing us — with self-deprecating humor — as “The Dumb and Dumber of Buddhadharma” can only thin the ego down so far getting minimal laughs, but today it seems way more appropriate for two guys attempting to master the human mind in an hour. [Note: I mistakenly say Bodhidharma instead of Buddhadharma in the video]
As always, we encourage everybody viewing or listening to use what is presented here as points of reference in their own research and check everything in their own (meditative) experience. What you hear today may even lead astray from better innerstanding the mind.
For better or worse, my lack of a Western Philosophical background which most people in the US addressing this topic are well versed in. My interest actually deals more with fringe topics that we won’t go into today other than to say they have potential to expand, give new perspectives and deeper comprehension with the risk of getting lost in the weeds and being unable to relate any insights to alleviate stress and suffering.
Define mind and provide distinction between similar terms of brain, attention, mindfulness, awareness, consciousness, thought/thinking, “thoughting” (thoughts happening without knowing why or willing them), and contents of mind/(mental) phenomena
Some cultures when asked where the mind is point to chest, others point to the head
Thinking seems to either be primarily in language, or primarily in image
Thinking exercise: OK, do not think of a pink elephant
Awareness exercise: OK, I want you to stop being aware, just cut it out.
[recently, from arrowriver.ca, heard definition of] Saṅkhāra as broadly defined as (compounded) formations/fabrications >> more narrowly can be defined as >> mental formations >> and yet more narrowly can be defined as >> volitional formations
Insights into Namarupa / Body and Mind
Some say because mind can’t be detected with senses there’s no such thing as mind.
Two other potentially relevant science-based sites:
heartmath.org — “HMI has developed reliable, scientifically validated tools since 1991 helping people reduce and avoid stress while experiencing increased peace, satisfaction and enjoyment. Research at the HeartMath Institute shows that, adding heart to our daily activities and connections produces measurable benefits to our own and others’ well-being. We are at the dawn of recognizing Love as the new transformational intelligence.”
noetic.org — Institute of Noetic Sciences: Inspired by Science, Transformed by Experience. The Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS) is a research center and direct-experience lab specializing in the intersection of science and profound human experience.
Bhikkhus, whatever a bhikkhu frequently thinks and ponders upon, that will become the inclination of his mind. If he frequently thinks and ponders upon thoughts of sensual desire, … upon thoughts of ill will, … upon thoughts of cruelty, he has abandoned the thought of non-cruelty to cultivate the thought of cruelty, and then his mind inclines to thoughts of cruelty.
Perhaps another pertinent point: the three types of people in the world likened to a person with a mind like an open sore, a person with a mind like lightning, and a person with a mind like diamond.
Audio only version — What Happens To Your Mind When You Meditate? | (1/14/2021 — “Ask Us Anything – LIVE” with Denny K Miu)
I’ve previously mentioned being fortunate enough to not really have been bogged down by physical pain, yet how to work with pain in meditation is a seemingly common request. Instead, for a while now, I’ve faced (energetic) blockages; or worse, ignoring them to continued and often increased detriment. I trust most of the following considerations may be helpful if experiencing blockages, especially when in meditation and contemplation:
Assessment: What’s being blocked, from where, how and why?
What is the origin, causes and root condition?
Is there an associated organ, energy meridian, and/or area of the body?
Can the heart of the blockage be located?
What is the essence of the blockage?
Can the blockage(s) be used as meditation object and/or how can it be incorporated into meditation?
Explore any and all correlation of the blockage(s) with cessation
What is the overall relationship with/to the blockage? Are there any other corresponding areas of the body with the blockage, and if so, what’s the relationship like between them? What is the relationship like between the blockage and the whole body?
Feel into the truth of the blockage
What can be noticed of the breath in and around the blockage?
What are any associated and related emotions? Why and how might emotions be relevant?
When/how do different aspects of the blockage change?
How could this blockage be trying to help?
Can this be made into a teacher?
Reverse psychology: what if I desired more of this blockage? Can I actually express genuine gratitude for and towards the blockage?
What does it need? Perhaps ironically, how can you serve it?
Bring complementary energy, not contentious or conflicting energy
Abstain from giving extra energy to the blockage’s blocking
Focus on the blockage’s changeability
Bring awareness to the wholesome pleasures of meditation
How is the energy — and energy circulation/flow — in and around the blockage?
Soften and notice energy flowing near the edges
Plug into and connect to any places of flow within the blockage area; as well as any other flow places in the body and with the body as a whole
Upon noticing, is there a defaulting to habitual patterns and tendencies in the ways and manners of attending to the blockage? If so, how quickly and frequently? And how long does it usually take to become aware of this?
What energy is needed and/or required for (and/or to address) this blockage?
Are there more wise and skillful terms to use and refer to other than “blockage” and “stuck energy”?
Is it helpful and wise to practice with the blockage using the four great elements — earth, wind, fire, water?
Consider perspective shift: ‘…shifting your awareness from “get me outta here” or “let me go” to “thank you for transforming me. I am ready to trust you now”.’ [(not specifically for blockages) via Matt Kahn 7/25/2021 newsletter]
Starting around 12 minutes 38 seconds, Ajahn Succito talks about how to work with blockages (on an energetic level) including:
introducing and invite blocked energy to unblocked energy
bringing the energy of the heart to the energy of the body
inclining the heart to open and patiently stay with and encompass the blocked area in benevolent energy
As a practice suggestions:
invite ideal energy — perhaps an area where there’s unblocked energy — to, from, circulating through, in, out and around in all directions, boundless. If requiring more specific energy, the sublime abidings of the Brahama Viharas may be helpful.
“wrap” the blockage in an energetic cocoon of the aforementioned energy
‘Feeling blocked does not mean anything is in your way. That’s just an old way of interpreting the mysterious complexities of life while confusing self-criticism and blame for new forms of insight. Quite literally, feeling blocked means you are in such a state of expectation that you are innocently blocked from seeing the circumstances of this very moment as evidence of what’s already on its way. The reason you may live in drastic states of anticipation is because you are an intuitive being who is so excited about what the future holds, you can’t help but do everything in your power to rush towards it.
The opposite of feeling blocked is being in the flow.
Quite literally, being in the flow means you are advancing towards the future in a more balanced, heart-centered, and grounded way — so much so, you are able to clearly see each moment as auspicious evidence of what is already flowing in your direction. The notion that you have to fix your blocks and ‘do everything you can to stay in the flow is an old paradigm way of unknowingly blocking the awareness of life’s inherent flow. It is simply the case of life planting seeds of possibility, only to refine the process as individual and collective consciousness ripens in maturity.’
Only if yet to achieve mastery with the aforementioned do I recommend considering the following, somewhat fringe, more metaphysical approaches that I’m not responsible for what does or does not happen so proceed only with full self-responsibility and with caution:
Investigate from various levels: astral, intuitional, vital, etheric, spiritual, divine, etc. [For possible reference see dharma teacher Phillip Moffitt’sNine Bodies of Consciousness teachings and meditations]
Perceive blockage as a reminder that on an higher/expanded dimension (perhaps 8D) any blockages have already been transmuted, transformed, and/or healed.
Experiment merging with the blockage
3/27/21 UPDATE: Beth Upton provides two major approaches that relate to cultivating samadhi: (starting at around 52min 11sec) One is an excluding and ignoring training where blockages unravel by themselves. The other is finding blockages and doing certain practices to unblock them.
RELEASING BLOCKAGE
In order to release the knot whereby saṅkhārā form the contracted state, you use skilful saṅkhārā. These helpful formations include the kind of thinking and the heart-energies and attitudes that flow along with healthy breath-energy. In a nutshell: be guided by your breathing rather than your self.
As a practical tip, this means that you don’t aim for the centre of the problem, and you don’t try to fix it; instead, you turn your attention to the overall embodied presence and let that steady your awareness. From that basis you access a source of steady and soothing energy – in this case, that of in- and out-breathing. (Otherwise, the presence of a kind and steady person is an invaluable resource.) Then the practice is to keep connecting the difficult area to the healthy mix of verbal, heart and embodied energies you have established as a foundation. This can then flow into and work on the difficult pieces – in its own time and way. Herein the golden rule is that you don’t go into a bodily or psychological area that feels highly activated, troubled or potent without that steady presence. The motto is: ‘good energy knows what it’s doing, so stay with it.’
As this work, and the releasing effect that it has, may seem disorienting, how can you be confident that this is the correct approach? The two standards to keep checking in with are a) ‘Is my whole body here – can I feel my feet, and my back? If I can’t, am I spinning out or tightening up? Better stand up, flex a little, or walk.’ This approach can help to facilitate a proper boundary within which energy can settle. In tandem with that, point b) is ‘Can I establish and maintain a quality of goodwill towards this experience?’ This isn’t as straightforward as it may seem, because it requires wise goodwill, not a sentimental coating. Goodwill as a Dhamma practice is informed by the understanding that ‘This energy or condition needs some supportive attention. I will place my awareness next to it and listen. May this quality of patient and sympathetic attention help it to find its resolution.’
This may seem to be over-cautious, but saṅkhārā are both the patterns laid down by reactions such as fear or repression or other forms of stress, as well as the ways whereby we manage these reactions. In brief, our emotional outbursts, our skilful and unskilful responses – kamma – are saṅkhārā. But rather than suppress or complicate them, the wise approach is to use embodiment and a steady heart to release and resolve these ‘kamma-formations’.
This irregular “Dharma Questions” series deals with “dharma” meaning both the truth of the nature of reality and some Buddhist teachings. Please see this post on the intensions for questioning and not questioning. Amongst other things these questions can be, but not necessarily:
thought experiments
borderline musings not meant to be answered
from laziness of not contemplating or researching them yet
The following questions explore Arhatship, the way of Bodhisattvas and Buddhahood from a limited innerstanding in order to gain clear, right, true knowledge for the highest good and well-being of all, without preferences. Even if based on proper premises some of these questions may be unanswerable and/or may be better left unanswered for now. Please see this post on why and why not to question for over-arching reasoning behind these types of inquiries.
Is there a Theravada equivalent to purelands/Buddha-fields and if so, do Arhats and Bodhisattvas apply? How?
At Paranirvana what happens to any and all abandoned karma on a mundane level especially if collectivity (ie., collective consciousness and interconnectivity) is involved? Do others then bear it? If so that would make entering Parinirvana kind of irresponsible unless being a great inspiration and benefit by doing so, right?
Could somebody desiring Buddhahood have no opportunity to do so (after becoming enlightened/attaining Arhatship) by hearing teachings from a Buddha (because then one would not be self-awakened)?
Where are passed(paranibbna) Arhats now?
Can arhats obtain Buddhahood (in current life)?
Can (the) arhatship (path) be a step on the Bodhisattva(hood) path and/or vice versa? If not, why?
If the historical Buddha was in previous lives an unenlightened Bodhisattva how/why did he become a Buddha? Wasn’t he supposed to forego enlightenment? (If the term bodhisattva here means something different than the current Bodhisattva vows could this term bodhisattva be misleading?)
Since the Buddha, after full awakening, was no longer subject to kamma in the same way as before, what dynamics or principles governed the situations and events that occurred after his enlightenment? Additionally, among the intentional thoughts, speech, and actions described in the Jātaka tales, which ones are explicitly mentioned in the suttas as having borne fruit for Siddhartha Gautama prior to his enlightenment? Conversely, are there any intentional actions—mental, verbal, or physical—not mentioned in the Jātakas, but referenced in the suttas as bearing fruit for him from previous lives before his awakening?
Where did the notion of saving all beings originate? Do beings need saved in the first place? How did it get like this? Why can’t beings save themselves? And if on an ultimate level there are no beings who/what is saving who/what?
If not completely liberated how can choosing to be reborn again and again until all beings are liberated best help completely liberate others without the knowledge of complete, total and full liberation? In other words, how can we best help others to the fullest capacity, and on/from the highest level if not fully enlightened? The paradox being once completely liberated, there’s no coming back (into a human life) to help liberate others right?
Could Bodhisattvas (attempting the) saving (of) beings interfere with the learning, growth and journey of some?
[Note: if changing the language of “vowing to save all beings” to something more like, “upon request, helping and instructing beings,” it puts to rest many of the “saving all beings” questions]
Could some bodhisattvas be under Mara’s control since choosing to forego full liberation and remain here where Mara is in charge? And could some only be a bodhisattva so as to achieve Buddhahood for themselves?
What if all beings became Bodhisattvas except a few or one?
If/when all but bodhisattvas have realized buddhahood/full enlightenment then how will/is realizing full enlightenment for bodhisattvas happen/gone about?
What happens if buddhahood happens spontaneously while a bodhisattva? Is that breaking the bodhisattva vow?
Could those vowing the Bodhisattva path be tempted with (unskillful, unwise, unwholesome) worldly power feeling they may need worldly power to accomplish vows?
Could more powerful beings lure others on to the Bodhisattva path as a reincarnational trap?
Can bodhisattva vows shy beings away from heavenly realms? If so don’t the heavens also need liberating?
Are there bodhisattvas in the animal realm? If so, who? If not, why not?
Can’t passed Arhats and Buddhas assist in liberating beings without being human here (like from a pureland or Buddha-field)? How could beings yet to realize enlightenment know a Buddha would provide more benefit while in the world?
Is a type of hybrid Bodhisattva/Arhat(/Buddha) possible?
Can Buddhas have been Buddhas in the past before, rejoined samsara, then reestablished Buddhahood?
It is said if one kills an Arhat, realizing enlightenment is impossible in that lifetime. Hypothetical thought experiments follow surround this: what if an Arhat worked as a doctor? What if this doctor had patients who did not comply with certain orders from this doctor that then lead, however directly, or indirectly to this doctor’s death? If say 20 people where involved at varying degrees of complicity, would they all then loose their chances for realizing enlightenment in the current lifetime? Why or why not, and how would this play out? Conversely perhaps, what if hospital administration and/or other authority figures in a way forced the hand of this doctor to not save someone when they could have; and then this was then found out followed by seeking and carrying out revenge; but while resulting only in serious injury to the government and/or authority figures, the death of this doctor Arthat was incurred? Or something else like: what if this doctor was in a coma and other healthcare providers for this doctor decided to pull the plug? And how about if the waters on this coma scenario were further muddied by multiple parties involved at varying degrees of mal-intent?
Could putting off enlightenment in Amitābha pureland due to strict requirements be a condition for dragging on rebirth after rebirth? What about those there being under outside influences to drag on rebirths for their own gain especially if stuck and/or maintain power? Could this happen? Why or why not?
How did the Buddha avoid (ever) being reborn in the pure realms (as he achieved all the formless jhana’s — if it works like that)?
What plan(s) do those on bodhisattva path have for (guaranteeing) encountering true dharma after (and between) dispensations of each Buddha?
Potentially related info, questions and answers from elsewhere:
For this month’s open-audience, open-discussion “Ask Us Anything” — continuing discussions about meditation and related topics — Denny and I address the “McMindfulness” phenomena mostly by exploring the translation of the original Pali word “sati” — often translated as “mindfulness” — by offering up “remembering” as a more original translation. We also touch on some classic sati related topics like:
The Five Hinderances
“Right Mindfulness”
12 Links of Dependent Origination (or “Conditional Genesis” [Pratītyasamutpāda]) especially “Contact” before “Feeling”
Four Foundations of Mindfulness
Also mentioned:
Some of the critiques and upsides of McMindfulness
Story of Shiva and Hindu goddess Sati
Body/Qi/Mind/”Void”
Metaphors/images for mindfulness from the Pali suttas
Below are our original show notes:
(Notes from Josh:)
Overall I don’t maintain a solid sweeping position for or against the popularity of mindfulness. I feel, like pretty much anything, the skillful and wise (pros) vs. the opposite (cons) must be weighed, and mostly on a case by case basis.
Without boots on the ground in many of the areas where mindfulness has gained popularity it’s even more challenging to speak to, or make broad criticisms and (especially) recommendations/solutions, which by the way, seem severely lacking.
This is a complex topic often addressed in an overly simplistic manner, glossing over significant material with many truths and mistruths mixed together.
When something gains popularity, (if it hasn’t already from the onset,) there seems a high likelihood for the agendas from various players — social, political, economic/industrial, religious, organizational, technological, etc. — to jump in and mold to their liking (and not liking) whatever can be molded, often resulting in distortions, divisions, and destruction.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/jun/14/the-mindfulness-conspiracy-capitalist-spirituality — some great points but no real solutions offered, mostly an underlying bashing of the current version of capitalism (which really isn’t capitalism. I don’t plan to mention political systems on the episode. For our notes: We all know the hangups of capitalism. Not a proponent of this version of gangster capitalism, nor a proponent of socialism, communism, or technocracy. Big proponent of solutions though. Some short term: voting with your dollar and paying attention to what you want to give energy to without ignoring or denying anything. Long term: various clues and bread crumbs I won’t go into here.)
Key points in general to address for the episode:
Defining mindfulness
Pros and cons of Popular/ (vs.) Secular/ (vs.) Buddhist mindfulness
Proper mindfulness (leading to awareness, the foundation for wise decision making)
Ethics involved in teaching and learning mindfulness (if mindfulness should be taught on its own)
With so much criticism is it possible for newcomers to dismiss mindfulness entirely, and/or the opposite, can mindfulness’s popularity lead and enforce followers to not properly examine mindfulness?
Potential questions for Denny:
China angle?
Observations from Silicon Valley compared to the Midwest?
What if asked to teach mindfulness to “black ops” military, or corrupt corporations and/or organizations, or anyone who you pretty much know will likely abuse it?
(Notes from Denny:)
Tomorrow we will focus on “McMindfulness and the Mindfulness Industrial Complex”.
Take any self-help/wellness topic (including Mindfulness and more recently Meridian Tapping Therapy), the pitch is always … “if you have Fear, Phobias, Anxiety, Stress, Emotional Trauma, PTSD, Grief, Sadness, Shame, Frustration, Anger, Resentment, Carvings, Addictions, Chronic Pain … and nothing works, try this?!”
Rather than criticizing the McWellness, I think it is more useful for us to properly define “Mindfulness”.
Mindfulness is Sati and the original interpretation is “remembering”.
According to Wikipedia, the English term Mindfulness already existed before it came to be used in a (western) Buddhist context. It was first recorded as myndfulness in 1530, as mindfulnesse in 1561, and finally mindfulness in 1817.
Then in 1881, Thomas Divids, a Pali-language scholar used it to mean Sati, where he wrote in his Buddhist Suttas, “Sati is literally ‘memory’ and is used with reference to the constantly repeated phrase ‘mindful and thoughtful’ (sato sampajâno) ….”
Sati was the name of the Hindu goddess of marital felicity and longevity. She was the first wife of Shiva (one of the three gods who along with Brahma and Vishnu, are responsible for the creation, upkeep and destruction of our universe, respectively).
The legend was that Sati’s royalty parents wanted a daughter and was advised by Brahma to pray before the goddess Adi-Parashakti. Finally she consented and took birth as their daughter but warned them that if she was ever insulted, she would return to her celestial form and disown them.
After Sati grew up, she married Shiva against the will of her parents. She was so devoted to her ascetic husband that when he was insulted by her opulent father, she jumped into the fire to kill herself in order to uphold Shiva’s honor.
Then as promised, Sati returned to being a goddess again and through another reincarnation, came back and became the second wife of Shiva.
Now that’s “remembering”.
Sati is also the name of an outlawed funeral custom in India where a widow immolates herself on her husband’s pyre in order to show her devotion (i.e., remembrance) by taking her own life shortly after her husband’s death.
In conclusion, Mindfulness (念 or Sati) is simply remembering.
The historical Buddha is regularly portrayed as primarily full of love and light in popular culture. While this is just one aspect, another angle this post intends to explore is the Buddha’s decisiveness, diligence, determination, and immense courage in the face of pretty much anything and everything without shying away from squeamishness. It’s also kind of an exercise in using the suttas (and sutras) to back a certain viewpoint — perhaps similar to how some can interpret various parts of the bible to support a vast array of agendas. Obviously doing something like this can range from wise and skillful to the complete opposite.
The Upayakausalya sutra ‘describes a past life of the Buddha as a ship captain, put in an impossible situation of letting a murderer kill passengers, or letting the passengers kill the murderer. In every scenario he foresaw with his psychic power, someone would be killed and people would be reborn in hell. He decided to kill the murderer himself…’:
Integrating Presence 